The Templar Code wrote:
A Templar is compassionate.
In his modesty he shuns glory.
His arm upholds the weak.
His blade defends the helpless.
His wrath undoes evil.
His mouth speaks only truth.
His word is unbreakable.
His integrity never falters.
His temperance is unshakable.
His virtue never wavers.
His valour sustains him through peril.

Yes, I ripped off a few lines from Dragonheart's Old Code. It was too good to not use some of it.

This obviously doesn't get into the minutae, but I think it's a good overall summary of what Knights Templar are expected to be, on top of basic thaumaturgic principles (which more will be posted about soon(tm)).

Looks great to me. I'm not sure someone with unshakable temperance can have any wrath to undo evil with, but other than that, it seems interesting and self-consistent. A bit stiff, but that fits the organisation well.

As we discussed over chat, for the "wrath" bit think along the lines "righteous fury", rather than just being really, really angry for unspecified reasons. See also the Merriam-Webster secondary definition of the word:

retributory punishment for an offense or a crime : divine chastisement

If a Templar sees their town besieged by demons and nethrim, or innocents being run down and slain by merciless highwaymen, some good old righteous fury is acceptable for the Templar to unleash against them. Not to say that being "wrathful" is something Templar should be doing all the time. That's why it says "undoes the evil". It's pretty much reserved for the extraordinary cases. You don't need to be unleashing wrath against a petty thief.

Skah wrote:A bit stiff, but that fits the organisation well.

That's right. If you don't want stiff moral guidelines and codes, be a Mercenary or Dwaedn (or go guildless)!

This is an exciting addition. I eagerly look forward to further development. If there is any revision, it might be well to revisit the mentioned wrath. While I understand the usage here, the worry over misinterpretation might merit finding an alternative means of communicating the concept.

I have always assumed my character took some sort of vow or oath upon joining the Knights Templar, and this code seems quite precisely in line with what I imagined.

(Alexander clenches a fist momentarily, then stops and calms himself with visible effort.)
[FROM Eira (OOC)]: LET IT OUT, MAN!

When a female templar does the oath, will they change it to "her something" or is it meant to be a unisex code to be said for all?Her tacos always tasty, Her lettuce is crisp, Her cheese is cheddar, Her meat freshly ground, Her tomatoes always ripened, Her shell is soft but sometimes hard.

I have a few questions about the Templar's code, but I'll hold until it's all released.

In regards to the code itself...I'd like to see the gender changed to "she" and the men can make the tacos themselves. :)

Much appreciation for the work and thought that is going into this. :)

CHAT - Sir Alexander Candelori: Truly a man is an abomination that does not dip his french fries into his chocolate frosty.
Bryce flatly says, "Just fair warning: If one of those things webs me, I'm going to scream like a girl."

I like this code. Not that I play a Templar. In Christian circles, we use the term "righteous indignation" to describe anger at an offense against God. An example of this would be Jesus driving the moneylenders and their animals out of the temple with a whip. Also, there is a verse that says "Be angry, and do not sin".

In my mind, this type of wrath/indignation/anger is not for an offense against the Templar himself, but against "good" in general. It wouldn't cause some kind of berserk rage, He would still act within his moral code even while wrathful. Anyway, there's me getting religious on you all! I realize Clok's "religion" isn't modeled after Christianity either, I just saw a few parallels.

Isiaa wrote:Of course, the Templar interprets the Good through his own lens...

It's been well established that there is a set behaviour that Templar and Monks are supposed to follow. So even if they define 'good' as something else, it doesn't mean they'd be following the Code.

“There is always a choice."
"You mean I could choose certain death?"
"A choice nevertheless, or perhaps an alternative. You see I believe in freedom. Not many people do, although they will of course protest otherwise. And no practical definition of freedom would be complete without the freedom to take the consequences. Indeed, it is the freedom upon which all the others are based.”

Isiaa wrote:Of course, the Templar interprets the Good through his own lens...

Doesn't everyone? The thing that's supposed to set Templar apart is that they sincerely try to strive to be truly good as much as possible, based first and foremost on compassion and selflessness, and the code and guidelines of their order. If they interpret "good" incorrectly and do bad things "in the name of good", they'll lose their Light and possibly their membership as a Knight Templar if they don't rectify things quickly - there's no way they could turn into some corrupt Templar who uses their thaumaturgy to burn holes in the necks of jaywalkers with spears of light and starts the revolution of the Holy Church Of Righteous Oppression Of All Peoples - because the Light wouldn't work. It doesn't accept excuses and technical loopholes in the codes or philosophies of men. If you turn into a holier-than-thou oppressive jerkwad, the Light is going to be beyond your reach despite what you might be telling yourself.

It gets really tiresome when people constantly assume/insinuate the worst, or bring their personal baggage every time there's a person or organization that claims to be striving to be good. It probably also gets really tiresome hearing me go on these rants all the time.

I'm all for shady, corrupt, deceitful, and downright evil organizations in my stories/games. Even the archetypal "people with good intentions gone wrong/too far/corrupt" is great fun, I admit. These groups make the world more interesting, and provide different and interesting perspectives and conflict. They also give the Good Guys something to work against. (And they're more fun to play as a GM!) But it boggles the mind that the vast majority of people seem to assume that every individual or organization striving for good is inevitably corrupt, hypocritical, or downright lying with some ulterior motive. Even several of its own members seem to consider themselves the only ones who "know the truth" and constantly suspect or even accuse their own organization because of this malady that makes everyone think "any organization claiming to be good is secretly bad", and that makes me profoundly sad on a disturbingly frequent basis.

At least in a made up fantasy world, can't some people sincerely want to be good people and have true compassion for others?